DiscussMormonism.com

When I was a member of the Mormon church as a new convert, I remember asking a lot of questions about how Mormons view other Christian faiths. Having grown up Catholic, I knew many good righteous Christians. I was told of course they have a piece of the gospel, they have a piece of the Holy Spirit. They just don’t have the fullness.

I was married in a Mormon temple. A small one in Texas. I got to see the inside and out, all of the attempts to reflect and inspire a sense of religious wonder with lavish architecture.

Folks, standing in Italy and seeing the real thing blew me away. I’ll post a photo here from last night:



I’m no longer a practicing Christian but standing in the presence of architecture and art here brings back a real sense of the transcendent. It makes LDS temples look like cheap mega churches.

For the life of me I can’t see how DCP can travel the world so often and not be struck at the tawdriness of his religion in comparison. It would be one thing if the LDS church leaned into modesty and humility, but Russell Nelson’s temple building spree is going to leave dozens of cheap imitations littering the landscapes of the communities unfortunate enough to be host to them.

drumdude wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 3:55 am

It makes LDS temples look like cheap mega churches.

For the life of me I can’t see how DCP can travel the world so often and not be struck at the tawdriness of his religion in comparison. It would be one thing if the LDS church leaned into modesty and humility, but Russell Nelson’s temple building spree is going to leave dozens of cheap imitations littering the landscapes of the communities unfortunate enough to be host to them.

drumdude - I felt that. Well said.

Mormon architecture is bad. It is ugly. it is plain. It is unimaginative. It is just, gawddamm awful. There is no way to sugarcoat it. The only impressive works in my lifetime, have been the restoration of the legacy impressive works - SLC, Logan and Manti temples. The two story chapels that used to exist, often with the basketball courts and stages on the second floor, are gone. Windows in temples are fake. Steeples are plastic and ordinary. The chapels look like multi-level marketing storage units. The entrances are as uninteresting as possible. This is not a money decision, it is a peasants-deserve less decision. But, it is also because the building department and architects are no-talent-having yes brethren.

It gets worse though, mechanically, they are as obnoxious as they are to look at. In Utah, the church hasn't built a chapel or temple that meets or exceeds minimal ventilation standards since mechanical standards applied to public buildings. They fail, and they do so miserably.

Whiskey wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 4:33 am

drumdude wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 3:55 am

It makes LDS temples look like cheap mega churches.

For the life of me I can’t see how DCP can travel the world so often and not be struck at the tawdriness of his religion in comparison. It would be one thing if the LDS church leaned into modesty and humility, but Russell Nelson’s temple building spree is going to leave dozens of cheap imitations littering the landscapes of the communities unfortunate enough to be host to them.

drumdude - I felt that. Well said.

Mormon architecture is bad. It is ugly. it is plain. It is unimaginative. It is just, gawddamm awful. There is no way to sugarcoat it. The only impressive works in my lifetime, have been the restoration of the legacy impressive works - SLC, Logan and Manti temples. The two story chapels that used to exist, often with the basketball courts and stages on the second floor, are gone. Windows in temples are fake. Steeples are plastic and ordinary. The chapels look like multi-level marketing storage units. The entrances are as uninteresting as possible. This is not a money decision, it is a peasants-deserve less decision. But, it is also because the building department and architects are no-talent-having yes brethren.

It gets worse though, mechanically, they are as obnoxious as they are to look at. In Utah, the church hasn't built a chapel or temple that meets or exceeds minimal ventilation standards since mechanical standards applied to public buildings. They fail, and they do so miserably.

I kinda like Mesa, AZ. It has a rectangular box sitting on a rectangular box sitting on a rectangle of grass. And you call that "unimaginative"? /s

malkie wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 1:13 pm

Whiskey wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 4:33 am

drumdude - I felt that. Well said.

Mormon architecture is bad. It is ugly. it is plain. It is unimaginative. It is just, gawddamm awful. There is no way to sugarcoat it. The only impressive works in my lifetime, have been the restoration of the legacy impressive works - SLC, Logan and Manti temples. The two story chapels that used to exist, often with the basketball courts and stages on the second floor, are gone. Windows in temples are fake. Steeples are plastic and ordinary. The chapels look like multi-level marketing storage units. The entrances are as uninteresting as possible. This is not a money decision, it is a peasants-deserve less decision. But, it is also because the building department and architects are no-talent-having yes brethren.

It gets worse though, mechanically, they are as obnoxious as they are to look at. In Utah, the church hasn't built a chapel or temple that meets or exceeds minimal ventilation standards since mechanical standards applied to public buildings. They fail, and they do so miserably.

I kinda like Mesa, AZ. It has a rectangular box sitting on a rectangular box sitting on a rectangle of grass. And you call that "unimaginative"? /s

So bad. So so so bad.

I'm not sure that the blandness of official Mormon aesthetics is accidental. I feel as though the Mormon claim to be a recently restored ancient religion is quite constraining. If a Mormon church teaches anything or does anything or builds anything that looks old and familiar, it undermines its claim that all the good things needed to restored. If it teaches or does or builds anything that looks new and different, however, it undermines its claim to be ancient. So it seems to me to be stuck keeping everything minimalistic and bland, and trying hard to sell that as great.

Physics Guy wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 2:06 pm

I'm not sure that the blandness of official Mormon aesthetics is accidental. I feel as though the Mormon claim to be a recently restored ancient religion is quite constraining. If a Mormon church teaches anything or does anything or builds anything that looks old and familiar, it undermines its claim that all the good things needed to restored. If it teaches or does or builds anything that looks new and different, however, it undermines its claim to be ancient. So it seems to me to be stuck keeping everything minimalistic and bland, and trying hard to sell that as great.

Minimalist is a style. This stuff is better described as cinder blockist.

The condescension of the lazy copy/paste architecture is certainly deliberate.

It’s interesting that some LDS temples look like the “great and spacious building” from Lehi’s dream. Large, mostly white in purity, and closed to anyone not already inside.

While the book represents the faithful being mocked by those inside the building, it is hard to ignore the parallel of the literal version of its own warnings.

Recently I drove through Nauvoo and Carthage while on a return visit from Norfolk, VA, and briefly stopped to see the temple there. I admit I thought there was a stark beauty to the simplicity.

Limnor wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 12, 2025 3:35 pm

It’s interesting that some LDS temples look like the “great and spacious building” from Lehi’s dream. Large, mostly white in purity, and closed to anyone not already inside.

While the book represents the faithful being mocked by those inside the building, it is hard to ignore the parallel of the literal version of its own warnings.

Recently I drove through Nauvoo and Carthage while on a return visit from Norfolk, VA, and briefly stopped to see the temple there. I admit I thought there was a stark beauty to the simplicity.

Ya know what? I have never been there. Perhaps I omitted that temple and should not have.

I suppose one can remember Italian churches result from over a thousand years of development of artistic ideas.

I am not sure of the difference creation but I like to consider that the churches were for the whole community which might make doors to artistic ideas more open. There were more private churches but they could use the inspiration of the larger community churches.

Physics Guy's observation may well still apply.

I love the great Christian architecture of the world, including cathedrals, basilicas, monasteries, convents, and LDS temples.